Opposition violence at Venezuelan university - What really happened at the UCV

According to eyewitness reports from Hands Off Venezuela members, violence broke out yesterday in Caracas when opposition students arrived back from a peaceful demonstration against the proposed constitutional reforms. Apparently frustrated by the lack of violence, a group of about 250 of the opposition students (many from other universities) went straight to the Central University of Venezuela (UCV) to the School of Social Work which is a stronghold of revolutionary students inside UCV.

There, a group of revolutionary students was campaigning for a yes vote in the referendum. They had an assembly for students/teachers/non-teaching staff in the morning and were putting up posters and giving out leaflets.

They were then attacked by the opposition students who surrounded the School. Molotov cocktails and stones were thrown, the toilets were destroyed, the door of the Students Centre (Bolivarian dominated) was burned down, and around 150 people (students, teachers and non-teaching staff) were trapped inside the building for several hours, with the violent opposition students trying to force their way into the building to lynch them.

Some of the students inside the Faculty are nationally known Bolivarian student leaders (including Andreina Taranzon who spoke in the debate with opposition students at the National Assembly earlier this year at the time of the RCTV protests). They managed to call the state TV and reported live on what was happening.

The police are not allowed to enter University premises owing to a law on University autonomy. The Mayor of Caracas offered the possibility of the Metropolitan Police going in to contain violence and allow people in the School to come out, but the rector of the University, a member of the opposition, refused the offer. The University authorities are responsible for security on their own premises and did nothing to prevent violence from escalating.

Violent oppositon supporters at the UCV- picture Reuters

Meanwhile, opposition TV stations were full of reports that masked Chavista supporters had fired on opposition students and that one person had been killed (this was then proven to be false, nine students were injured, most of them from inhaling fumes from the fires started by opposition students).

Finally, the head of emergency and fire-fighting services was allowed by the rector to go into the university and negotiate the safe exit of the people who were trapped inside the School of Social Work by a violent mob of opposition students.

The School of Social Work trashed by opposition students (ABN)

The international media has been "reporting" about these clashes as if "armed Chavista gunmen" had fired on peaceful opposition students. A member of Hands Off Venezuela was present at the University when the violence broke out. He reports that the gunmen who originally opened fire stopped him on his way through the UCV to the Bolivarian University nearby. He reports that the two gunmen on the motorbike did not look like students, but were more likely thugs hired for the occasion and that they were shouting anti-Chavez slogans and boasting of having shot at Chavistas.

Even news agencies now are reporting that Bolivarian armed men arrived at the UCV after the opposition students had sieged 150 people inside the building of the School of Social Work to help those sieged gain safe passage out:

Later, armed men riding motorcycles arrived, scaring off students and standing at the doorway - one of them firing a handgun in the air - as people fled the building.(The Guardian)

What Hands Off Venezuela eyewitness report is that, faced with the inaction of the University authorities, hundreds of students, University workers and people from nearby neighbourhoods finally went into the University to help the people at the School of Social Work escape from the violent mob of opposition students. Some of them were carrying guns, which was only normal considering the extremely violent nature of the situation.

Bolivarian students, teachers and non-teaching staff have now held a joint meeting at the UCV and called for a demonstration against fascist aggressions to take place in the UCV on November 15.

Videos of the violent attack by opposition students can be seen here: RENEGADE EYE

125 comments:

Unbelievable development. It is now as clear as ever that the opposition in Venezuela not only exists so as to protect the capitalist status quo, but, the opposition is in fact fascist and violently so.

With your permission, giving you the credit and a link to this blog, I would like to repost this article on the PCF forum.

Unbelievable development. It is now as clear as ever that the opposition in Venezuela not only exists so as to protect the capitalist status quo, but, the opposition is in fact fascist and violently so.

Fascists have always been just as anti-capitalist as their socialist cousins. So either your label of "fascism," or your label of "protectors of the capitalist status quo" is incorrect.

On your own terms I have to consider you part of the right. You are the people that hate all advances in the gay rights, women and civil rights movement. You are the heir to the ideas of Billy James Hargis, Father Coughlin, Charles Lindberg, Jerry Falwell etc. You believe 9/11 was in response to gay rights. You sleep with dictators as Pinochet, turn a blind eye to human rights abuses in Colombia and you support torture. In addition you are hostile to unionism.

Tell me about how great this anti-Chavez opposition is? Talk specifically about Venezuela. Arguing semantics is a dodge.

I forgot you define yourself as "anti-left." I certainly don't define myself as a negative like "anti-right." I don't as well define myself as "the left." It would be including me with anarchists, Democrats or popular fronters.

Maybe Chavez will define himself as "anti-right," and obliterate the pro-oligarchy scum. You shouldn't complain, by your definition he'd be doing his job.

No, I would not be at all suprised is the US government were helping the rightwing in Venezuela engage destablization. Killing innocents to thwart leftist gains--they have no problem with this. Just as they have no problem with thousands of dead Iraqi and Vietnamese children.

But when you have such power--you can (somewhat) create reality. It is just that only the most mind-numbed ethical retards are willfully ignorant enough to believe the propaganda.

The great thing about Venezuela is that if they invade, they will also destroy the US economy with incredible fluxuations in oil prices. LOL And Chavez et al know this.

A bit off topic- well, completely so- thanks for visiting my blog and offering encouragement to the fight against Child Protective Services in New York City. CPS is an issue that the left just doesn't "get." www.fatoldjewishguywholivesintheprojects.comwww.acsmustbestopped.com

Events in Venezuela seem to be coming to a head. Like you I do wonder how much longer president Chavez can be "Mr. Nice Guy."

Renegades,Pat Robertson, who publicly stated that Hugo should be assassinated has now thrown his support behind Rudy Giuliani - the man who heroically had numerous press conferences in front of the rubble created on 9/11/01 when He was mayor of NYC, and who's in favor of gay rights and women's rights. All us righties know that good ol' Pat has his noggin twisted on real tight. And since Pat endorses Giuliani, we can assume that Pat is pro gay and female, and Giuliani is all for the assassination of Hugo Chavez. Can't you see what us real Americans see?

The worst FDR ever did to his political opposition was pin a German Iron Cross on a member of the House of Representatives that criticized his wartime leadership.

Despite his leftist efforts in domestic and economic policy, FDR would have needed to do something a bit more criminal / unconstitutional to his democratically elected opposition, shut down the free press, and placed more businesses under state control to put him far enough left to be considered a fascist in my book.

Well, what do you know. Chavezuela is on its way to becoming a fascist state.

Rudy: If I were a Democrat, I'd be very happy about Rudy being the GOP nominee. I mean the other Rudy, not you.

Being pro-abortion is Rudy's only redeeming quality, and the fool compromised it. The power of the Christian right has always been overrated. Even reactionary women don't want to go to Mexico for an abortion.

Assassinating Chavez would bring socialism to South America, quicker than anything.

How many Christian rightists do you actually know? I know one. They count for nothing politically.

Hillary scares me more than Rudy. As for a female president being a gain, two words; Margaret Thatcher.

Beamish: Did you read the post? A petit-bourgeoise mob holding people hostage in a burning building, is a fascist act. One characteristic of fascism, is that it is independent of the state.

I've never participated in a demonstration, where people have molotov cocktails or slingshots, trying to provoke violence. I know if something like SDS did that, you'd be complaining to high heaven.

Have you ever seen a television show, or listened to the radio, and found it giving instructions for insurrection against the state? RCTV did that. If you want to talk about controlled media, check out Alan Garcia in Peru.

One characteristic of fascism, is that it is independent of the state.

There's an interesting variation of the tiresome "Communism's never been tried" canard - "Fascism's never been tried." Never mind all that "Everything for the state, nothing outside the state, nothing above the state" rhetoric from the author of Fascism. Now there can be no Fascist states - fascism being "independent of the state?"

Are you sure you're familiar with the history of the same planet I'm on, Ren?

I would like to correct a statement I made earlier. FDR did not pin a German Iron Cross on a Congressman, but rather presented one to John O'Donnell, his most constant critic at the New York Daily Post.

While tasteless, and perfectly in keeping with the leftist need to smear their critics rather than answer them, this repugnant act still wasn't left-wing enough to be fascist.

I've never participated in a demonstration, where people have molotov cocktails or slingshots, trying to provoke violence. I know if something like SDS did that, you'd be complaining to high heaven.

Remember the anti-WTO riots in Seattle, back in 1999? Did all those windows smash themselves?

How about the "anti-war" protests? We had one here in St. Louis back 2003, where several people of the "anarchist" leftist persuasion were arrested with molotov cocktails in their backpacks. Did they bring the bottles of gasoline in case someone's car broke down out of fuel on the way back to doing enough Jenkem to enjoy reading Chomsky?

Look, I'm not defending anyone forcing others to be burned alive. It's such a leftist way to kill someone, what with all the socialists holding tire-necklacing parties for their enemies in South Africa and Angola and Haiti and so on. It's a horrible way to go, and a very inhumane thing to do to another human being.

That said, I think you can condemn the people burning other people in Chavezuela without accusing them of being leftist (i.e. "fascists").

A print journalist, an RCTV Reporter and 4 cops were shot by Chavistas yesterday in Merida.

The violence is coming from the Chavistas THUGS on their scooters. They started these hit and run drive by demonstration harassment tactics back in late May when RCTV was shut down by Chavez. I've got TONS of videos showing them.

Beamish: What differentiates fascism from something like a military dictatorship as Pinochet's, is the social basis for a fascist movement, is people caught between big capitalists on one side, and a rising working class on the hand.

mind if I repost this on my blog?? this is a very good article and clears up alot. It's really a shock how the bourgeois media attempted to portray this as a government crackdown or some bullshit rather than an attamt at counter-revolution.

Whats the matter LeftHenry, your own eyes are lying to your brain? Chavista THUGS ARE shooting university students. The government controlled Chavista news monopoly simply hasn't been able to stop the real news from escaping via the internet. And you should know that since the 5/31 expropriation of RCTV, the "bourgeois media" no longer exists in Venezuela.

Go to my blog. Look at the guy in the orange Tee shirt with NO in huge letters and a hard hat. Then look at the picture from the "protest" in the post above it... all with colored Tee's with big NO's on them and hardhats.

Now look at the kids with the guns. They are all holed up INSIDE the dorms.

Look at the pics AGAIN. Count the guns and note that the same guy w/grey sweatshirt as mask and wearing a blue long-sleeved sweatshirt in the top photo attacking the NO orange tee-shirt guy is in numerous other group shots, where ski-masked gunmen wielding automatics are emerging from doorways.

But the rhetorics are not only lazy - they are murderously so. Continue with the logic of your pal Caudillo Chavez, and see where it gets you.

http://simplyjews.blogspot.com/2007/11/are-you-still-chavista.html

If you consider yourself of true left, you should be first to stand up and to reject his Nazi-style raving. Unfortunately I haven't seen any protests from the likes of you lately. Only unlimited adoration.

Ten years from now, after mass graves are discovered and when Chavez will be on trial in Hague for genocide, and all the leftists will be claiming that capitalists were buying oil from his regime, and that Chavez regime wasn't leftist at all (like they claim now about Pol Pot), this post will be proof how the Left, in 2007, actively supported and encouraged crimes against humanity.

It is not surprising that, with a sleight of hand a question of social justice is being converted to a discussion of universal premises of civil society, human rights, law of self-defense (yes, it is extremely impolitic to take up a handgun when the aggressors are modest enough to make do with slingshots), right to assemble, freedom of speech, etc. It is gibberish to accuse Chavez for his furtive attempts to undermine the “democracy” by extending the length of presidency when the opposition is genuinely against the economic reforms. But our democrats and humanists in the shallowest sense, all the wise people who are keen on the superiority of freedom and democracy have no intention to debate about the social consequences of constitutional reforms except the one targeting the article 230. So what about the “social stability fund”, limitation of working hours, autonomy of the Central Bank, agrarian reforms preventing the large estates, etc? Are you promoting the freedom of speech enough to apply your own freedom appropriately?

I think our friend Mehmet raises an important point. It is ironic that the defenders of the oligarchy (who let us remember, were ever so democratic during the 2002 coup when the abolished the National Assembly, Supreme Court, Constitution, rounded up Chavez supporters by the score, shot and beat people on the streets, etc.) are so obsessed with pointing out this or that detail in a photo taken during an extremely polarized and chaotic situation which is by no means black or white, instead of discussing the real issues at hand: what do the proposed changes to the Constitution mean from the perspective of the different layers in Venezuelan society; who is for the changes, who is against, and why, etc.

Incidentally, photos can "lie". Unanswered by a snapshot are the following questions, among numerous others: are those riding the police motorcycles actually part of the police? if so, are those police pro- or anti-revolution? when was the photo taken - at the beginning of the fray or toward the end? what photos / incidents are NOT being shown? Etc., etc.

Much more important is a rational discussion of what the fundamental changes taken place in Venezuela really mean. If you oppose the will of the majority of Venezuelans, as reflected by the most part in the person of Chavez, fair enough, but why not give political arguments instead of falling into "he said, she said" and straw man debates. Why not discuss the actual issues involved? I actually respect those that can calmly and rationally outline their differences and back them up with an honest admission that at root, they oppose the process because they feel that their class interests are under threat, instead of obscuring the real issue with hypocritical moralizing about violence or the "rules" of civil society, etc.

I have posted my comment also to Marxmail, here is Néstor Gorojovsky's response which explains the situation more clearly:

"All this reminds strongly of what happened with the ArgentineanConstitution of 1949, in a sense, the single one that should belegally applied even today.

This constitution was the legal framework that Peronism offered to thecountry as an emanation of its own tasks.

To be sure, it had many articles of an authoritarian and evenMedievalist character, and Peronism had called for a Congress ofPhilosophy in the conservative town of Mendoza as a previous step tothe Constitution, during which Tomism and its ideologues wereenshrined as the greatest acumen of Western Philosophy.

As compared to that constitution, the Venezuelan one and its reformsare an Anarchist pamphlet drafted during a night of heavy drinking bysome student of the University of Paris in 1968. Even the right ofstrike was seriously curtailed...

But, oh misery, there was a chapter in that constitution, with threearticles. Three articles only. Articles 38, 39, and 40. These articlespredicated on the relations between property rights and the nationalrevolution.

They established immediate nationalization of imperialist concerns,reserved the commanding heights to State ownership, etc., etc., etc.In the Catholic verbiage of "ius naturalismus", a "social function ofcapìtal" was taken to constitutional level thereby allowing Stateintervention against any private endeavour menacing the harmonicdevelopment of productive forces (harmonic, from the point of view ofan independent, self-centered, capitalism).

This constitution was superseded by a military decree after the 1955 coup.

And the Buenos Aires Herald, the most conspicuous voice of imperialistinterest in the capital city (by those times still a Britishbourgeois, imperialist, newspaper written and published in the RiverPlate) headlined the piece of news "Infamous article 40 overthrown".

If -God forbid- the efforts by the Caracas youngsters of anti-Chávezconviction ever come to realization, the Bolivarian Revolution isbrought to an end, and the Constitution repealed, some Caracas Heraldwill headline more or less the same way. Or, maybe not. Perhaps theyhave learnt from the Argentinean experience."

And my reply was:

"When someone confronts you with raising his voice about democraticconcerns, it is really hard to decide whether he is intending to embraceor abuse you. But one measure might be applied in the sense of Badiou'sconcept of "EVENT". Are you proposing something that will cause aninterruption in the current state of affairs or just attempting to suspendany possible breakdown of the status quo? With this criteration it issomewhat easy to evaulate the concernings of bourgeois media about theincidents in Venezuela."

A total of five people were injured on Tuesday at the Libertador Experimental Pedagogic University (UPEL) as the sequel of student protests against the changes to the Constitution prompted by President Hugo Chávez.

According to early versions, a meeting was being held at the university located in Barquisimeto, the capital city of central-western Lara state. A gang rode their motorbikes to the site and attacked the participants. The clash resulted in five people wounded, including a member of the university internal security corps, said university sources, DPA quoted.

Thursday 8 - Five students wounded in the countryside in Venezuela

Five students and a reporter with daily newspaper El Impulso were wounded Wednesday during a peaceful demonstration university students staged in Barquisimeto, northwestern Lara state.

José Aguinaraldos, the dean of the Medicine School of Lisandro Alvarado University, said the police forced the students to change the route of their march and lead them to ambush, where hooded armed bikers were waiting for them.

Students accused Mayor Henri Falcón and governor Luis Reyes of the violence unleashed by government followers, who attacked the university students in front of the police.

btw - Anybody catch the >cadena (mandatory Public Service Announcements) being broadcast on the "oligarch controlled" television stations following Halloween? It sure DEMONIZED the students, even dressed them up in Halloween costumes... almost to the point of drawing bulleyes on their backs...

The commercials recommended Venezuelans "reject violence", but dressing the students up as monsters, is that in any way, shape or form a public service?

I doubt it ever gets colder than 60 degree's F in Caracas. The only place in the whole country where one might actually need a ski-mask is atop Pico Espejo/Bolivar at the top of the teleferico in Merida. It's the only place it snows when you are located THAT near the equator.

I've been awol from my own blog, wasting time arguing with a troll and tango dancing at a church sponsored tango event with a cute Russian woman. I'm still catching up on the issue.

Sonia: I keep telling you shouldn't throw "the left" around so much. Most of the left are watching Venezuela from the sidelines. Even most Trotskyists hate Chavez. Most on the left don't want to dirty their hands by participating real events.

Maybe these buried victims, will be buried with their gas masks, hard hats, slingshots etc.

Pol Pot was leftist, but was supported by the US. The Vietnamese were the real left.

Beamish: Deny what?

Farmer: When I have a Venezuela discussion, I enjoy when you visit. If you didn't comment, I'd invent another Farmer John. The good part is that you can't resist.

Funny that the leader of the student movement's name is Stalin Gonzalez, and guess what? He is Stalinist. He believes socialism will come if the opposition wins.

At UCV the autonomy issue is the real question. At one time, in response to a 1968 put down of university students by the Mexican government, it became a trend for Latin American universities to have security autonomy. That was progressive for its time. In light of this, I think university security needs a reprimand.

One would think if armed guys on motorcycles arrive, the opposition would flee, instead of being nonchalant.

The opposition obviously isn't interested in debating the issues, using forums to express themselves. They prefer the diversions of issues and holigan tactics, because if they won by democratic means, they would have to admit the system works. If I led the opposition on say the RCTV issue, where Chavez was in the minority, I would have won.

In the US, when you have a demonstration, you get a permit from the state. If you violate terms, the state comes down on you. That is reasonable.

Do you have any answers for JP's questions? I will post them as again for you.

"among numerous others: are those riding the police motorcycles actually part of the police? if so, are those police pro- or anti-revolution? when was the photo taken - at the beginning of the fray or toward the end? what photos / incidents are NOT being shown?"

Perhaps, without context, those da*n pictures can tell less than the truth? Caracas is a very violent place.

I am not talking specifically about this incident, nor do I have any concrete evidence, but it isn't unthinkable that the ruling business class would pay criminals to sport some pro-chavez attire and go fire shots at opposition students. In fact, I would be surprised if it hasn't happened quite a bit.

But seriously, I heard one the female students lost her brand new Prada bag during one of the protests. tragic.

It doesn't MATTER whether they are policemen of not. The pictures show, without ANY doubt, that the armed THUGS are FOR Chavez and had prepared themselves in ADVANCE for crimes and violence with ski-masks and weapons, while the anti-Chavez forces had to make do with the materials at hand - rocks, a sling shot, trash fires, etc.

And guess what Renegade Eye. I wouldn't give a sh*t whether Chavez had been elected with a 99% majority. 51% of the people cannot vote to make 49% of the people their slaves. MY liberty is not something subject to YOUR vote. If you try and change the Constitution to make me your slave, I will fight you, with my bare hands if necessary.

I'm a CLASSICAL liberal. You cannot use democracy to create POSITIVE liberty to confiscate my NEGATIVE liberty. I actually have "un-alienable" rights. Read Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance. Socialism is a religion that cannot be imposed with FORCE.

In other words, my purpose in life is my own. I am not a cog in the wheels of ANY State. And in Venezuela "Atlas" is about to "Shrug" and then "leave".

Oil may support Chavez for fifty years or a hundred. But the people are NOT going to profit from it. They'll be living in the same 'ranchitos' one hundred years from now. All Venezuelans will be doing is trading one set of oligarchs for a much cruder sort of oligarch.

As for the small "middle class" that a free market in Venezuela once supported... those are the people who will suffer most and leave.

from Madison's "Memorial..." 1. Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.

This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator.

It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign.

We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority; but it is also true that the majority may trespass on the rights of the minority.

SO STOP TRESPASSING! I don't care whether you are a DEMOCRAT, a COMMUNIST, or a FASCIST. You are TRESSPASSING on an UN-alienable right.

The great thing about America is that "minorities" have rights. They have "negative" liberties which the State and other people CANNOT alienate. Like "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". My property is part of my happiness. Keep your hands OFF it!

2. Because Religion be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: it is limited with regard to the co-ordinate departments, more necessarily is it limited with regard to the constituents.

The preservation of a free Government requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to defend the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The People who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them, and are slaves.

3. Because it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of Citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The free men of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much soon to forget it.

Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?

You want to help the poor. Then donate YOUR money to them. STOP reaching into MY pocket so that YOU can give something, and "feel good" about yourself.

At one time, in response to a 1968 put down of university students by the Mexican government

You don't know much Venezuelan history, do you...

Subsequent events recast the students at the Central University of Venezuela, in Caracas, into the most significant opposition to the Gómez regime. Having closely observed the Mexican Revolution of 1910 and the Russian Revolution of 1917, the students launched a struggle in 1928 to liberate Venezuela from Gómez's grip. The revolt began in February, when Jóvito Villalba and two other students were arrested for making antigovernment speeches. In protest, other students then challenged the dictator to jail them as well, and Gómez complied by arresting 200 student activists. A popular demonstration followed. Police dispersed the demonstrators with firearms, killing and wounding many participants. With the assistance of a few young military officers, the rebels then stormed the presidential palace, which they managed to occupy briefly before being overwhelmed by Gómez's troops. Gómez then closed the university and rounded up the students, many of whom ended up laboring on road gangs. Some of the movement's leadership languished or died in prison; those of "the generation of 1928" who managed to escape into exile, like Rómulo Betancourt, Rafael Caldena Rodríguez, and Raúl Leoni, were later to become the nation's principal political leaders.

...believe me Ren, whenever the government wants to VIOLATE university autonomy, They do it.

Most of the video's showing the Guardia Naccional's June '07 frontal SWAT Team style assault of the university URBE in Zulia have been taken down (two I had previously linked two) They even had a police command post there immediately following the RCTV demonstrations. Student burned it down. That video is missing, too.

But that doesn't mean that the events never happened! It only means that the minions of Orwell's MiniTru are actively "revising history".

While expecting Plato or Socrates, you came with another white guy whose sole purpose in life was to keep white guys like him in charge of everything- James Madison- the "father" of the constitution. Charles Beard wrote about the economic origins of the constitution in the early 1900s. That piece of paper was written by a few people that intended on keeping their property (which of course included other humans) and their elite societal status intact for years to come. It was about keeping the status quo.

"Property rights" too often trump human rights. Having a home that is yours, not the governments or landlords, is a right- I have no beef with possessive property. Having 20 homes while many have none, however, is not. Just like people in the fake, speculative economy don't "earn" anything, people (or corporations) that, on paper, have land or homes in excess don't "own" anything more than you or I do. Not in any legitimate way. Corporations, of course, don't even have a legitimate right to exist, but that is another topic.....

Funny a Spanish unelected monarch lecturing an elected president Yes I saw that too. How funny that people (left and right) can do anything to exploit any political ideas so that they can feel better about themselves. The western left has always been critical towards the actual left in other countries for historical reasons....etc

Having a home that is yours, not the governments or landlords, is a right (...) Having 20 homes while many have none, however, is not.

Very well said. Once, I thought exactly like you. It made sense.

But I changed my mind when I saw those 19 homes. Wrecked and vandalized by their new owners who found out that it is just as hard to maintain a confiscated building as it is to build it in the first place.

Someone who is not capable to built his own home won't be able to maintain it properly even if Chavez gives it to him brand new.

That's why Communism (whether Soviet or "Bolivarian") will always fail. It only profits the incompetent.

That's why Communism (whether Soviet or "Bolivarian") will always fail. It only profits the incompetent You don't need to be a communist to believe in equal principles although natural differences exist. For the french model, we are equal in rights because we know we cannot be equal in fact. In a philosophical sense, the ultimate aim is not freedom but collective happiness, then at this time people can be equal in right because we are equal in fact.The american model (based on the principle of freedom) is not able to demonstrate this capability when any individual has to achieve the pursuit of happiness. Both of the models tend towards one aim but they take it with different angles.

Little off topic: Spain still thinks it could dictate to its colonies. Pro-Franco Minister Jose Maria Aznar of Spain, tried to organize diplomatic support for the oligarchy coup in 2002. Chavez was questioning him about how much he knew of it before it happened.

It's true that there is a scary group of thugs, that support Chavez. Both sides have thugs,

What is getting lost is in early December, the constitutional measures are going to be voted on. These provocations by students, who so resent the unwashed masses rising, are trying to create a situation, where the vote will not occur.

I know aggression is a key to wining but what is the meaning of this is loose-aggressive style like raising with J6 offsuit from out of position. The problem is you are playing your middle pair like you have the nuts. So, a single incident is enough to condemn idea behind the constitutional reforms. What a big surprise? Someone is indenting to capture the state power. Do you think that capitalists really care about the intensification of state power when that power serves their objectives? Still there is not discussion on the consequences of economical amendments. Nice hand, well played…

“The craving for universal unity is the third and last anguish of men,” claims the Grand Inquisitor in Dostoevsky’s great novel, The Brothers Karamazov. The great English liberal philosopher of Oxford's 'All Souls' College, Isaiah Berlin, wrote that it was exactly that desire for universal unity that was most “responsible for the slaughter of individuals on the altars of the great historical ideals.”

Patria, Socialism o Muerte. Chavez is a MILITARY man FIRST and FOREMOST. Don't let your desires get the best of you, Mehmet. Try leading with your head every once in a while, and only play Hearts, when they're trump.

"The demand for equality in the mouth of the proletariat has therefore a double meaning. It is either — as was the case especially at the very start, for example in the Peasant War — the spontaneous reaction against the crying social inequalities, against the contrast between rich and poor, the feudal lords and their serfs, the surfeiters and the starving; as such it is simply an expression of the revolutionary instinct, and finds its justification in that, and in that only. Or, on the other hand, this demand has arisen as a reaction against the bourgeois demand for equality, drawing more or less correct and more far-reaching demands from this bourgeois demand, and serving as an agitational means in order to stir up the workers against the capitalists with the aid of the capitalists' own assertions; and in this case it stands or falls with bourgeois equality itself. In both cases the real content of the proletarian demand for equality is the demand for the abolition of classes. Any demand for equality which goes beyond that, of necessity passes into absurdity. We have given examples of this, and shall find enough additional ones when we come to Herr Dühring's fantasies of the future.

The idea of equality, both in its bourgeois and in its proletarian form, is therefore itself a historical product, the creation of which required definite historical conditions that in turn themselves presuppose a long previous history. It is therefore anything but an eternal truth. And if today it is taken for granted by the general public — in one sense or another — if, as Marx says, it "already possesses the fixity of a popular prejudice", [52] this is not the effect of its axiomatic truth, but the effect of the general diffusion and the continued appropriateness of the ideas of the eighteenth century. If therefore Herr Dühring is able without more ado to let his famous two men conduct their economic relations on the basis of equality, this is so because it seems quite natural to popular prejudice. And in fact Herr Dühring calls his philosophy natural because it is derived solely from things which seem to him quite natural. But why they seem natural to him is a question which of course he does not ask."

I am a little bit tipsy right now, sorry for my last post which was obviously inelegant. I just pissed off that you suddenly treated me as I am an Orwellian social designer fantasizing a future of a single subject. When I cited "solidarity", I didn't even think about the idea of "unity" once.

Do you think that capitalists really care about the intensification of state power when that power serves their objectives? Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, it depends on their expectations and priorities. They cared in Uzbekistan (Human Rights with Karimov), they won't care in Pakistan because it allows them to have a footprint in China and India, it's still all about power, and it has nothing to do with capitalism for this case. You can change the system (socialism, communism, islamism) and the same behavior will repeat from itself in the name of values, and these are universal values since they are shared by everyone, and the lack of cultural understanding is the determinant factor to pursue their goals (from each side). In fact I would blame first the human being before blaming the system, whether it is capitalism or socialism (bis repetita).This 21st century, far to be over, may turn out to be very surprising for all of us. The demise of the dollar is at a turning point. The more power abroad the US under Bush wants, and the more countries are reluctant to trade with the dollar currency. To top it off a huge oil barrel price reaching the near-$100 is going to send wrong signals in the whole middle-east and countries are going to start trading with other currencies. In fact many countries started following this voice such as China, Russia, Syria (that eliminated the dollar), Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Sudan, and maybe Iran. We (Europeans and Americans) are at a critical point of our own history, the same way your History was during WWI if you see what I mean. These problems could have been avoided if nobody had gone to Iraq, but it is too late now and we can't ignore the problem anymore. We need to get out of our political ideas and find an another alternative. Unfortunately from my side I don't see any solution to the problem.

Ren set this whole thread up to paint the VICTIMS of an ARMED invasion by Chevez supporters as "the bad guys" for having the cajones to fight back with rocks and anything they could find.

YOU people ARE the NEW Dixiecrats! You avert you eyes when it's one of YOURS in charge! The KKK is okay in your book, just so long as it's those "sons of the rich" and "mostly white" (LOL!) students who are being harassed.

"When it comes to America's relationship with Pakistan, remember one thing: it's all about the fuel.

The Bush Administration's muted reaction to the new dictatorial rule of Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf can be traced to the American military's logistics problems in Afghanistan. Without the cooperation of Musharraf's government, the 24,000 U.S. troops who are stationed in Afghanistan would likely run out of fuel within a matter of days......

Greg Wilcox, a retired Army officer who has written extensively on military tactics and operations, says that if the fuel from Pakistan gets cut off, the U.S. would have to try flying fuel into its bases in Afghanistan and that, he believes, would be "mission impossible." Wilcox told me that when it comes to the Pakistan, "We don't have any choice. We got kicked out of Uzbekistan so we don't have any bases there. We can't survive in that region without Musharraf. We are tied to him whether we like it or not."....."

Kent State University, May 4th, 1970... Have you forgotten already? Or, has all that righteousness twisted your tongue?

I've heard and seen everything there is to hear and see about the tragedy at Kent State, from the accurate to the conspiracy theory fantastic, all through recountings and retellings in the media, of which none are barred from publishing or broadcasting by the US government.

What's the precise combination of drugs I must do to equate yet another example of Chavezuelan fascism to the dynamics involved in bringing rioting war protesters under control?

The National Guard didn't show up at Kent State until the "war protesters" were smashing businesses and burning down campus buildings.

You're going to play hell finding an alternate reality in which this is at all comparable to what's going on in Chavezuela, by any stretch of the imagination.

Kent State is different, in several ways. Not differentiating between breaking windows and burning a symbol of the war in Vietnam, when it's not occupied, is different than coming with slingshots, molotov cocktails to hurt people. The violence against students at Kent State was state sponsored and in Venezuela it is being debated who is who. In Ohio one was shot on their way to class and one shot in the bank. I don't know if it's true, that thee was a cadre of trigger happy Guard is true. Both situations are not simple, that are answered by snarky black and white comments.

From a letter from Caracas: Dear friends:

I'm in Caracas and quiet busy giving conferences, writing and givingworkshops for activists of the communal councils about qualitativeevaluation based on the italian model of the "conricerca", the co-investigation. The idea is that they will hopefully build a ownnetwork for qualitative evaluation not depending on any institution.

The situation in Caracas and Venezuela is tense. But not nearly as tense as the media wants us to believe."The students" are protesting against the constitutional reform.Armed violence is quiet spread between these right wing student, many ofthem members of richt or extreme right political organizations, youth oder student branches of right wing parties. The violence is notdirected only towards the bolivarians or the surprisingly friendlypolice (the use of firearms by the police on demonstrations is forbiddenanyway) but also between them. The 2nd of november a students opposition group shot at another students opposition group in the ZuliaUniversity in Maracaibo killing one girl and hurting 11 students. Butthe presse declared it as an attack by bolivarian students or even police... But in the end these right wing students ar few, but get a spectacularinternational media echo. There are more than a million students inVenezuela, about 500.000 just in Caracas. But at nation wide marchesjust about 10.000 participate.The 7th of november opposition students, after a demonstration, attackedsome bolivarian students putting up poster in favor of the reform insidethe university and than they attacked the institute for social work of the Central University in caracas (UCV) with stones, bottles and somefirearms shouting "we will lynch you all" and tried to set the buildingon fire while the prevented the poeple inside for about three hours to leave the building. The police didn't intervene cauze it's notauthorized to step inside the university unless called by the directors(that didn't call the police).The pics presented by the international press showing two or three armed bolivarians where taken when some security guards from the TV stationavila TV came to rescue a jounalist of the channel trapped inside thebuilding and the other 124 people. The just watched the place while they took everybody out of the partly burning building.(you'll find an article here: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/2814and a video here: http://www.radiomundial.com.ve/yvke/noticia.php?t=990&sid=dd52e2de36f48f32b78e7b1db1b2 4ee6 )

The only injured by firearms is a bolivarian student shot in the abdomen.The 8th of november "students" in Merida threw molotow cocktails out oftheir march at the communist party office...

The university presidents or directors of the old public universities inVenezuela (the whole old public university system has about 440.000students, the new public Bolivarian University system, built up since2003, has 330.000 students, including the decentralized universitysystem Misión Sucre) are nearly all taking a stand against theconstitutional reform and the process of social transformation.

The transformatory bolivarian process turns university access into not anymore exclusive for the elites. So the directors, often owners orpartly owners of private universities loose a lot of business. Not justthe widepread selling of university access. So f.e. the opening of newschools in public univerisities is determined by a kind of organizationof the university directors. As a consequence they haven't allowed theopening of one public law school since 1958. That way they earn a good mones with the students visiting the private law schools...Moreover the constitutional reform also will introduce the parity of thevotes of workers, professors and students in the different universityboards (until now a professors vote is equal 40 student votes). This old demand of student movements all over the world is considered by theuniversity directors as an attack on the autonomy of the universities...

In the end the students demonstrations are part of a propaganda strategy that begun in 2006. The opposition parties and their already discreditedpoliticians are maintaining a low profile while the students (financedby the USA, business and right wing foundations) are presented aspeaceful youngsters worried about the democracy in their country...

But the different grassroots organisations in Venezuela are ready to actand declared that they are not willing to accept more intents ofdestabilization.

This is very worrying. It just goes to show how confident the counterrevolutionary forces are starting to feeling if they're prepared to attack supporters of the revolutionary process. In this case, if the university authority's security apparatus isn't prepared to intervene, then Bolivarian comrades need to be prepared to arm themselves and organise militias in their defence.

some security guards from the TV station avila TV came to rescue a jounalist of the channel trapped inside the building and the other 124 people

Question, ski-mask wearing security guards...? Were they on their way to Merida to do some skiing later, or does everybody in Venezuela keep a ski mask in their pocket ready for wearing when the temp dipa below 80 degrees F?

And since the government regulates the Venezuelan press, can't they DO anything to keep ALL those LIES out of print & video off the air? You'd think Venezuelan journalists had NO standards!

And since you say that there are a million university students, 440k in the old system and 330k in the new, when are authorities going to launch their investigation into the kidnapping of 230k students that appear to be missing. Are extreme right wing groups holding them hostage?

And by the way, remind me to stop the DNC from funding all those private university students in Venezuela. My kids here in the states aren't getting nearly all the grants they should be getting, so I guess I'll have to vote for a Republican to get this gross abuse of my tax dollars from continuing.

And thanks in advance for spreading the good news that the opposition in completely discreditted!

Are the Venezuelan authorities making a mistake in cntinuing to call for non-violence in the nightly cadenas? And didn't Hugo just buy a 100k Kalishnakovs AND a Russian Kalishnakov factory expressly for the purpose of arming his 100K... soon to be 3 million... man militia?

Surely some paltry 400k slingshot-wielding university students are NO match for them!

I just finished blogging about the rise of fascism in Venezuela. The opposition movement has a well-defined fascist nature and needs to be opposed at all costs. The stakes are higher than ever before, especially with the referendum coming up soon.

Farmer: Did you read Beamish's comment supporting state violence at Kent State? That was a situation dealing with broken windows and sacking an unoccupied ROTC building. This is on a much higher level.

In Venezuela many of the police, sided with the junta. If police are on a scene, it's uncertain they act in behalf of the state and the public. If Chavez doesn't reorganize the police and military, he'll end up being Allende.

From your POV, it should be sad, that Chavez could lose this referendum, if the opposition simply used legal campaign channels.

Sonia: There are thugs on both sides.

The student's spokesperson Stalin Gonzalez, is a Shining Path supporter.

Beamish: The point is the level of violence in Venezuela is much higher than what happened at Kent State.

It's not that you support it. You listed reasons why the Nat'l Guard was called.

My point is there is no analogy, since the opposition is trying to make a crisis situation, where there are thugs on all sides, and compromised loyalty from the army and police.

The bottom line is Kent State has no place in the discussion, it's a bad analogy.

The opposition is not far away from Chavez supporters in Venezuelan polling about constitutional changes. If they weren't into polarizing they could win, or atleast come close enough to brag. If they won they'd have to admit the system works, and they can't get themselves to do that.

I don't understand what you mean, when you say opposition leaders can't vote?

Why repeat the RCTV debate, between pro and anti RCTV students, ehen the pro-RCTV staged a scripted walkout. The opposition isn't about debating the pros and cons. It's about counterrevolution. They could care less if they lose the election. They wouldn't even run parlimentary candidates. Afraid they'd win.

The point is the level of violence in Venezuela is much higher than what happened at Kent State.

Granted. As you aptly put it, "...Kent State has no place in the discussion, it's a bad analogy."

I think the larger point is that none of stories coming out from either side of this conflict make Chavez look good, and he's got the media in cities and in the Chavezuelan hinterlands all to himself. His opposition can barely get out word that they exist (at least in Venezuelan media) much less what they're about, and they're expected to sit quietly while Chavez railroads a dictatorship through their constitution.

Some leftists claim Bush and Cheney have done worse to the US Constitution, yet not one molotov cocktail yet (if you don't count the vandalism and shoot-ups of Republican campaign offices across America during the last 2 election cycles).

it should be sad, that Chavez could lose this referendum, if the opposition simply used legal campaign channels.

Legal channels? Officialsita channels? You really have NO concept of what is happening in Venezuela. Chavez OWNS the "legal channels". In Venezuela EVERYTHING has to go through "official channels". Otherwise, you can't get your permit to demonstrate or operate a TV station. RCTV. THAT's whats wrong with "officialista" channels.

Even the student movement is being usurped by the "officialistas". Do you see the cadena loop I posted. Did you see how they referred to the student leaders as "supposed leaders" as opposed to "official leaders". Chevez is ALL over the distinction. Grass roots civic activity has NO voice unless given the "officialista" stamp by the government.

Want to apply for a permit to demonstrate? These are Hugo's own words, two week ago...

"Are we going to fell into the same trap (of 2002)? Why don't you punish the television channels? You (Minister of Communication Jesse Chacón) have the relevant power. Do it! It is provided for under the law, and if you do not dare, then forward the resolution to me, and I will certainly sign it!,"---"Assuming that this fascist minority manages to unleash violence in the streets, we are going to run them over,"---"The next time, you need to assess whether you are going to okay their demonstration, because you will be granting permission for them to come to burn downtown Caracas. What kind of weak government is giving permission to some fascists who are threatening to burn cars with people inside?"---He added an investigation is under way into the people who convened the protest, and claimed that the leaders "want some people to get killed."

"You have to assess this. You should not be surprised if you grant them a permit to march to O'Leary Square and then they will go to (the presidential palace of) Miraflores to burn it. This is the way the events of April 11 (2002) started, because of our weaknesses. But we will not allow this, you sons of daddy, you filthy rich people."

Chavez has been granted dictatorial powers. Under a left-fascist dictatorship, the ARE NO LEGAL CHANNELS! You might as well beg STALIN for a permit.

I posited Kent State, not as an analogy, as they are obviously different events, but as a reminder to those over-opinionated, self righteous Yankees who seem to believe that they always have the moral high-ground.

Before slamming the actions of a democratically elected leader and the Venezuelan citizenship, perhaps it would be wise if those 'people' (if you can call them that) perhaps look at their own state of affairs and their own blood soaked history.

As such, Kent State was posited as a reminder, not as an analogy. But then, analogical thinking is the simplest form of critical reasoning, so it's no surprise that it's been accepted in this way.

Methinks its about time that Chavez ARMED THE PEOPLE. I don't want to see this turn into another Allende-type dithering, where 500,000 Chileans demanded weapons in front of the presidential palace and he refused.

If I had been part of the initial Iraq invasion force, i would have been passing out an AK-47 and a case of ammo to everyone I saw... and then gone out the other end of the country into Turkey, never to be seen again...

Other Topic:Gen. William Ward, an African American, has been handpicked by the Bush administration to lead the newly created U.S Africa Command (AFRICOM). The base and host nation for AFRICOM is yet to be disclosed.

That is pathetic Beamish, even for you. This is not 'my' country, it's simply the place I live and I'm not simple minded enough to get too passionate about national ego. Britain's a rainy, grey shit-hole - what's your point?

Then again, on the subject of advancement, we do manage to provide universal healthcare for everyone, universal education for everyone and we managed to abolish the death penalty years ago.

And then that ammo would be used to destroy your own soldiers, who are perceived as an occupying power!!!??? The methane must be getting to you, Mr John.

Think so? The guys who wanted to keep U.S. out ALREADY HAD guns and AMMO. LOL! And they could push the rest of their neighbors around and keep them from ratting them out BECAUSE the 'innocents' were unarmed.

They DID welcome U.S. with open arms when the 1st tanks rolled through! And I wouldn't have stayed long enough for them to start shooting at me!

I just find it endlessly hilarious to get into compare and contrast discussions about political freedom with people who need a fuckin' license to operate a television set in their home. (Never mind the driving on the wrong side of the road thing.)

Although, instead of fantasizing about what you'd 'do' in Iraq, why don't you get off your fat arse and join those young men and women on the front-line, instead of just blabbing about it all on the internet?

Miss Beamish:

Okay Beamish, guess a guy in your position has to try and laugh at the world. What with your mama already being your sister and your Daddy her 2nd cousin - must have been hard growing up! Boo hoo.

I'm not moping either. It's great being British at the moment, given that our unadvanced currency means we can buy cheap goods from America because the dollar is inflating into nothingness. The joy of being backward. Oops.

To mop up your mess: we drive on what is known as the 'left hand side', not the 'wrong' side, of the road.

We also have the TV License to fund the BBC so that it's free from commercial interference. This means we get balanced news coverage, sporting events and various social and political programmes for a small fee each year. I guess in a world awash with corporate propaganda, commercial television and pay-per-view that this concept is alien to you, rather like the NHS.

Although, instead of fantasizing about what you'd 'do' in Iraq, why don't you get off your fat arse and join those young men and women on the front-line, instead of just blabbing about it all on the internet?

Because some of us have to stay at home and expose the domestic traitors.... like you.

Terry, We also have the TV License to fund the BBC so that it's free from commercial interference. This means we get balanced news coverage, sporting events and various social and political programmes for a small fee each year.

Well, when Britain, excuse me, the "United Kingdom," strips the monarchy of its power to dismiss the PM and dissolve Parliament, much less the ridiculous "Royal Assent" reserve power / powdered wig ceremony that dictates that no laws are passed in the UK without the Queen's decree - then tell me about how Bush and Cheney "trash the US Constitution" - and not before.

Make sure you explain that people who operate television sets in the UK without a license are being jailed in the UK "for their own good."